Dear Editor,
On par to see the media and Anthropogenic Global Warming believers gang up to slander a questioner of their beliefs. If the science is so strong, then discuss the facts instead of resorting to the ad-hominen put-downs.
Contrary, to recent articles, Lord Monckton of Brenchley is not a climate denier. Skeptics embrace climate change as a natural and ongoing process. Skeptics question whether the human effect is significant enough to outweigh natural climate drivers.
Your reporter may want to do some real investigative reporting.
Why are the model predictions for warming being proved wrong by observed data? Hansen’s lowest temperature rise prediction, in his 1988 paper, is significantly above actual rise to date.
Why do all 4 of the major data-sets, GISS, UAH, RSS, Hadcrut show no statistically-significant warming has occurred for 13 – 17 years, despite rising CO2 levels?
Why do paleoclimate temperature reconstructions show CO2 Lags temperature?
Why actual sea level rise in the Wellington area, for the past century, is 3.03mm per year or 30.3cm over the last century, but we are being asked to plan for 1- 2 metres? 300-600 years out? C’mon?
Given that past temperature models are being proved wrong, why would you expect model predictions of 1 metre sea level rise over the next 100 years to be correct, when historical fact tells us 30cms should be expected? There is no evidence of an accelerating SLR, merely models and conjecture. Facts driven policy please, not conjecture nor questionable model predictions.
Why the ‘canary in the coal mine’ glamour poster-boys – polar bears – are at such a high population level that the recent CITES meeting set their status again on Appendix 2, with hunting allowed?
Why has their population grown from 7,000 to 25,000, during the time of satellite-measured (since 1979) record Arctic ice loss, but we are being told future ice loss threatens them?
Why do more scientists discuss whether there actually is a CO2 GHE?
Why does recent Antarctic research, and the recent Climategate 3 emails leak, establish the Medieval Warm Period as global, with temperatures equalling today’s if not warmer?
And if so, why is current warming unusual, and not a natural occurrence, with temperatures merely recovering from the Little Ice Age which ended in mid 1800’s, just prior to where Hansen and Mann so conveniently track their warming temperature graphs from?
Start in 1850 and you prove warming. Take the baseline back a 1,000 years and you prove cooling.
I’m sure Lord Christopher Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, will be only too pleased to debate some of these issues with Professor James Renwick on the night, should he attend, where he will be treated most courteously.
Jim McIntosh
Raumati South
